Suzuki Samurai was Re: [geeks] SPARC proprietary (waaaay

[Kurt Huhn]

On Wed, 15 Oct 2003 10:49:50 -0600 (MDT)
Dan Duncan wrote:

> As I recall, 'Dan Sikorski' wrote:
> > Why? so that the next time someone slams on their brakes so they
> > don't hit a rabbit crossing the road, and you can't stop in time or
> > otherwise avoid it, and the bozo that you hit claims that you caused
> > some back injury that prevents him from working and living the rest
> > of his life normally, you can get jail time?  No thanks.  More power
> > behind traffic laws allow for far more abuse of them.
> 
> Stop endangering the rest of us by following so closely and you
> won't have to worry, will you?
> 

Non sequitor.

Some vehicles stop *way* more quickly than others, and a variety of
reasons could prevent you from stopping in time.  

The person slamming on their brakes to avoid the tree-rat needs to be
taken out back and beaten mercilessly.  They're a danger to everyone
behind them because a) they think a squirrel is more important the
safety of themselves and anyone behind them, and b) that had no idea
anyone was behind them and might hit them if they slammed on their
brakes.

> 
> A bad driver is a bad driver no matter what they are driving, but they
> amplify their risk to ME by driving a big vehicle.   I'd like to see 
> repeat bad drivers suffer successive limits in vehicle size until
> they either shape up or enjoy their mopeds.

Er...no.  While you might find that idea great, 99.99% of the rest of
the folks in this country would no more take to that idea than they
would a 50% federal income tax.

The long and the short of it is that you can't limit people's freedom to
choose in that fashion.  It simply isn't feasable, not at this point in
time, at least not in the USA.  You might get away with that in some
European contries where a Ford Contour (er, Mondeo, sorry) is a
"full size" vehicle.  But that would *only* be because nobody drives
anything as large as an Excursion and the grand bulk of people see no
need for a vehicle that large anyway.  How the frig would it fit down
those narrow streets anyway?

> 
> People who drive 15 passenger vans often do so professionally and 
> I haven't noticed any greater tendency to cause accidents.  This
> is NOT true for SUVs.  In my experience.  YMMV.
> 

Not *really*.  At least not if you watch the media.  According to
various prime-time magazine shows (dateline, 20/20) here in the states,
a 15 passenger van is a deadly threat to passengers, driver, and
surrounding vehicles.  A lot of 15 passenger vans are used
non-professionally - that is, the driver has not been specifically
trained in piloting that vehicle.  Such as the ones used as campus
shuttles, church buses, by people carting around huge familys, etc.

I'm not saying that 15-passenger vans are dangerous, but the media
certainly would have you think so.

Anyway, where was I going with this...oh yeah!  If you're believing some
statistic that SUVs are dangerous, or drivers of SUVs are dangerous,
you've been led down a very wrong path.  Any car is dangerous, and
you're driving a Honda Civic, and you get hit by a bad driver in a Honda
Civic - you'll still get injured.  Yes physics plays a small part in
*how* injured, but in this litiguous society, that matters not.

-- 
Kurt                 "I am not aware that any community has a right to 
kurt at k-huhn.com       force another to be civilized." 
                                                   --John Stuart Mill